Re: Authentication workflow draft.

On 4/12/11 4:05 PM, Henry Story wrote:
>
>
> <aside topic="rest-vs-soap">
>  Btw. REST tools are even more widespread that SOAP or xmlrpc tools, 
> and they are even more widely understood.  Amazons REST services was 
> used 85% more in 2003 http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/3005
> And if you ask developers they prefer REST
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/76595/soap-or-rest

Be careful, don't make quantum leaps about "developers" and certainly 
not "developers" and their comprehension of REST-ful client-server 
programming.

Peter (as I do sometimes) is explaining in too much detail. He could 
also simply say: hey! Let's just WebID enable these existing Windows 
tools by subtle tweaks within .NET Frameworks which drives most things 
these days .
>
> Here is a very good presentation btw on REST btw
> :
> http://t.co/l1bmeeZ
>
> It's not really worth having arguments on this here.
> </aside>

Does REST really matter if WebID is propagated all over the place by 
tweaking existing protocols (good, bad, and the downright ugly) and 
libraries across a plethora of platforms?

RDF is confusing, REST is confusing, both are kinda provincial since the 
rehash old ideas in new context. I remember a time when Web wasn't 
Client-Server it was Application Server etc.. Then it was about SOAP, 
then REST etc.. In reality a much ado about nowt bar rephrasing to 
celebrate subtle context tweaks to old patterns via injection of new 
terminology etc..

Let's get WebID out everywhere. No RDF or REST distractions. Just the 
ability to read and write structured data to Network Addresses subject 
to ACLs driven by the WebID protocol :-)


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
President&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen